This is just in case anyone missed my post from ~7 days ago.

The poll for "The worst BSG Season Finale?" closes in just four hours. I normally post a warning about 24 hours before closing time, but I missed the mark this time.

So, vote your preference there please, if you haven't already.
(Ignore this if you have already participated.)

So far 47 people have voted, and the results currently are:

Preference	Support
S01E12-E13 Kobol's Last Gleaming, Parts 1 & 2	12.8%
S02E19-E20 Lay Down Your Burdens, Parts 1 & 2	23.4%
S03E19-E20 Crossroads, Parts 1 & 2	23.4%
S04E19-E21 Daybreak, Parts 1, 2, & 3	40.4%

Don't post any comments here.
This is just a reminder.

Does anyone else have this problem? My users have been complaining about it for the past month. I'm guessing it has something to do with a recent update in Teams because it wasn't a problem before. I just want to confirm that it's a wider issue, and maybe check if someone has found a solution.

Description of Problem

1. Navigate to a sub-folder in a Team. Any directory tree with multiple sub-folders should suffice, e.g. Directory → Sub-Directory → Sub-Directory.
2. Open a file within that sub-folder. It's important that the file open within Teams (e.g. an Excel file or a picture). If it opens in an external app (e.g. Excel or a photo app), then the behavior won't be observed.
3. Close the file in Teams. Instead of being dumped back into the directory where I was - e.g. Directory → Sub-Directory → Sub-Directory - I get dumped back into Directory and I have to navigate back to the directory where I was working. This is especially annoying if I am working within a deep-level directory and opening and closing many files.

I've inherited an already-configured multi-site MikroTik setup. I'm still figuring out what each configuration does (many are outdated or no longer needed).

I'm currently trying to change the existing mix of OVPN and L2TP connections to an all-WireGuard site-to-site network.

The basic conceptual setup, at least initially is:

• HQ: Site 0

• Branch A

• Branch B

• Branch C

The HQ has a WireGuard instance running with 3 peers set up for each branch. The branches each have one WireGuard instance and 1 peer (which is HQ). In other words, HQ is the hub and the branches are the spokes (for now).

I already have WireGuard successfully set up and working (Public Keys, Shared Key, and Allowed IPs are all correct).

I have also set up static routes for the appropriate subnets at each site.

This is more or less the config:

HQ MikroTik router:

• LAN IP: 172.16.1.0/24

• WireGuard IP: 10.1.1.1/24

Branch A MikroTik router:

• LAN IP: 172.16.2.0/24

• WireGuard IP: 10.1.1.2/24

Branch B MikroTik router:

• LAN IP: 172.16.3.0/24

• WireGuard IP: 10.1.1.3/24

Branch C MikroTik router:

• LAN IP: 172.16.4.0/24

• WireGuard IP: 10.1.1.4/24

I ran into an issue with one site (let's say Branch B) where the HQ MikroTik router could ping the Branch B MikroTik router and Branch B LAN hosts, but hosts on the HQ LAN couldn't ping the Branch B MikroTik router or Branch B LAN hosts.

I eventually determined that turning on NAT for all interfaces on the HQ router allowed me to ping the Branch B router and LAN hosts, which led me to discover that the Branch B router also had NAT on for all interfaces. After changing the masquerade rule to only apply to the WAN interface list, I was able to ping both sides of the WireGuard connection with no problem.

Now I am experiencing the same issue, but with Branch A. Except this time I have confirmed that there is only one masquerade action on both sides of the connection, and that it only applies to the WAN interfaces.

Note that everything is working perfectly fine (without NAT) for the Branch B and C connections, all of which have the same WireGuard and routing setup that I configured. Also note that WireGuard is working fine at all sites: the HQ router can ping all.the branch routers and vice versa. So, I know the problem has something to do with the previously existing configuration, and is somehow related to NAT, but is somehow not related to a setting in the NAT tab. Also, since this problem only affects one branch, I assume the issue is with the Branch B config.

My question is:

What other settings might cause me to need NAT active on the WireGuard interface at HQ for me to be able to ping the router and LAN hosts at Branch A?

I know many of you are going to ask for my configs, but I don't have access to them right now (it's still the weekend), and I'm just looking for some ideas of what other settings might cause this kind of behavior.

The final results are in from my previous poll asking you to choose "the third-best" (or the "second-worst") of the four BSG Season Finales. Out of 56 votes cast in the 7-day poll, the Season 4 Finale (and the Series Finale) Daybreak won the contest by a slim margin. Click here for detailed results.

Crossroads already won, barely, the first poll for "best" BSG Season Finale, while the Kobol's Last Gleaming won the second poll for "second-best" BSG Season Final.

I'm now asking you to pick the fourth-best, or the "worst", Finale.

• If you already participated in the first, second, or third poll, now's the time to vote for #4.
• If you missed the first, second, or third poll, please don't vote for your favorite, or second-favorite, or third-favorite Finale here: think about which Finales are your #1 and #2 and #3, discard those options, and choose the fourth-best Finale!

I would've done one poll with all 16 possible options, with the four Season Finales ranked in all possible orders, but Reddit polls don't allow more than six options, so had to do this series of four polls to try and figure out roughly how the community ranks the four Finales.

After voting, I'd love to see details / discussion on why you think your choice is the worst Season Finale, compared to the other three.

View Poll

This is just in case anyone missed my post from ~6 days ago.

The poll for "The third-best BSG Season Finale?" closes in a day and a half.

So, vote your preference there please, if you haven't already.
(Ignore this if you have already participated.)

So far 53 people have voted, and the results currently are:

Preference	Support
S01E12-E13 Kobol's Last Gleaming, Parts 1 & 2	22.6%
S02E19-E20 Lay Down Your Burdens, Parts 1 & 2	20.8%
S03E19-E20 Crossroads, Parts 1 & 2	26.4%
S04E19-E21 Daybreak, Parts 1, 2, & 3	30.2%

Don't post any comments here.
This is just a reminder.

The final results are in from my previous poll asking you to choose "the second-best" (or your second-favorite) of the four BSG Season Finales. Out of 216 votes cast in the 7-day poll, the Season 1 Finale Kobol's Last Gleaming won the contest by a healthy margin. Click here for detailed results.

Crossroads already won, barely, the first poll for "best" BSG Season Finale.

I'm now asking you to pick your third-favorite, or the "second-worst", Finale.

• If you already participated in the first or second poll, now's the time to vote for #3.

• If you missed the first or second poll, please don't vote for your favorite or second-favorite Finale here: think about which Finales are your #1 and #2, discard those options, and choose the third-best Finale!

I would've done one poll with all 16 possible options, with the four Season Finales ranked in all possible orders, but Reddit polls don't allow more than six options, so I will be continuing this series to try and figure out roughly how the community ranks the four Finales.

I'll do one more poll asking for the "worst" Finale as a final follow-up (after this 7-day poll ends).

After voting, I'd love to see details / discussion on why you think your choice is the second-worst Season Finale, compared to the other three.

View Poll

I saw this posted within the last 24 hours by @NatGeoHistory and @NatGeoScience on Instagram:

• https://www.instagram.com/reel/DZfmUidiD6N/

Many people, and many of you reading this, still hold to outdated pop-culture beliefs based on millennia of civilizations' propaganda, and especially on Colonialist / Industrialist / Capitalist propaganda, that agriculture was a universally superior survival method as compared to the more "primitive" hunter-gatherer (i.e. foraging) strategy that served humans well for 300,000 years, hominids for millions of years, and all animal species for hundreds of millions of years.

You've probably learned this myth from teachers in primary and secondary education (i.e. elementary and high schools), who were themselves misled by this pervasive false narrative. It has been reinforced over the years by similar opinions from friends and family, and by casual references in all forms of popular entertainment.

Humans have only been practicing agriculture widely for about 10,000 years, and it's not because prehistoric humans were stupid, or because they hadn't "figured out" that you intentionally and systematically could grow plants for food. It's because it was a strictly worse survival strategy by almost every metric, except for rapid population growth, and in many ways it still is. We are still dealing with many of the disastrous ill effects of the move from foraging to sedentary, agricultural-based civilization.

If you're wondering how this is related to BSG, it's in reference to this much longer post about many of the common criticisms of the BSG Finale, many of which are founded on myths and misunderstandings of prehistoric human history.

Ten months ago, I linked to a paper with the following link:

• https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/2578983X.2021.191137

...which I believe should also work as:

• https://doi.org/10.1080/2578983X.2021.191137

However, neither work currently, and even googling "10.1080/2578983X.2021.191137" only returns the one Reddit comment where I used the link. I also checked web.archive.org and archive.ph for any records of its existence, but I couldn't find any working snapshots.

• How and why would a DOI disappear so thoroughly from the Internet? Was it a retracted paper?

• I assume from the locator code it was from 2021?

• Is there any way to figure out what the original title and author of the paper was?

It seems the easiest / best way to enroll a low volume of older Intel Apple computers that don't have the T2 chip is to go to https://aka.ms/enrollymymac, install Company Portal, follow the steps to enroll as a personal device, and then switch the device from personal to corporate in InTune.

My question is: once the device is enrolled in InTune via this method, how will it behave if I do a fresh install again?

This method requires setting up a local user first, and then joining InTune. I'm used to the Apple Configurator / ABM method with newer T2 devices, and using that method from the initial setup screen, the user logs into the device from the get-go with a user that is linked to their Microsoft Account.

If I do a fresh install on this older Mac that is already registered in InTune, will it behave like a newer Mac during the initial setup, and ask for the user's Microsoft credentials before allowing them to set up a user?

This is just in case anyone missed my post from 6 days ago.

The poll for "The second-best BSG Season Finale?" closes in less than one day.

So, vote your preference there please, if you haven't already.
(Ignore this if you have already participated.)

So far 212 people have voted, and the results currently are:

Preference	Support
S01E12-E13, Kobol's Last Gleaming, Parts 1 & 2	32.1%
S02E19-E20, Lay Down Your Burdens, Parts 1 & 2	25.5%
S03E19-E20, Crossroads, Parts 1 & 2	23.6%
S04E19-E21, Daybreak, Parts 1, 2, & 3	18.9%

Don't post any comments here.
This is just a reminder.

The final results are in from my previous poll asking you to choose "the best" (or your favorite) of the four BSG Season Finales. Out of 914 votes cast - after being neck-and-neck for most of the 7-day poll - the Season 3 Finale Crossroads won the contest by only one vote, just barely edging out the Season 2 Finale. (I wonder who cast that last deciding vote 😅) Click here for detailed results.

I'm now asking you to pick your second-favorite Finale.

• If you already participated in the first poll, now's the time to vote for #2.

• If you missed the first poll, please don't vote for your favorite Finale here: think about which Finale is your favorite, discard that option, and choose the second-best Finale!

I would've done one poll with all 16 possible options, with the four Season Finales ranked in all possible orders, but Reddit polls don't allow more than six options, so I will be continuing this series to try and figure out roughly how the community ranks the four Finales.

I'll do two more polls asking for "third best / second-worst", and finally "worst", as follow-ups (after this 7-day poll ends).

After voting, I'd love to see details / discussion on why you think your choice is the second-best Season Finale, compared to the other three.

View Poll

This is just in case anyone missed my post from 6 days ago.

The poll for "The best BSG Season Finale?" closes about 24 hours from now.

So, vote your preference there please, if you haven't already.
(Ignore this if you have already participated.)

So far 872 people have voted, and the results currently are:

Preference	Support
S01E12-E13, Kobol's Last Gleaming, Parts 1 & 2	25.1%
S02E19-E20, Lay Down Your Burdens, Parts 1 & 2	27.5%
S03E19-E20, Crossroads, Parts 1 & 2	27.5%
S04E19-E21, Daybreak, Parts 1, 2, & 3	19.8%

Don't post any comments here.
This is just a reminder.

I would've done one poll with 16 choices, with the four Season Finales ranked in all possible orders, but Reddit polls don't allow more than six options, so we will have to go with "the best", to start with.

I'll do more polls asking for "second best", "third best / second-worst", and finally "worst", as follow-ups (after this 7-day poll ends).

After voting, I'd love to see details / discussion on why you think your choice is the best Season Finale, compared to the other three.

View Poll

I'm running a near-clean install of Windows 11 Pro S5H2 with the latest version of Outlook (New).

I have notifications turned on and allowed for Outlook in the Windows Settings, and I also have desktop notifications turned on in the Outlook settings.

I've tried several test Calendar events and nothing pops up.

Does anyone else have any problem with this?
Did you fix it?

Can anyone else confirm?

I go to the HP Support website, and search for my model number - 14s-cf1050TX - and the result appears valid in the search field, but then when I click on the result, it takes me to a 404 page.

I've tried the US, Canadian, LatAM, and several Asian sites: all the same result.

I've also tried using a VPN for different countries: all the same result.

How can I download the latest BIOS or drivers for this model if the HP Support website is broken?

I'm not managing many Macs or many printers, so I decided to try a (I thought) simple approach to deploy a couple of printers in macOS via InTune:

• On a reference mac running Tahoe, I downloaded and installed the latest driver package from the manufacturer (Ricoh) for the printers. I successfully added on the printers and could print to them.
• I used the app called Packages to create a PKG file that copies all the files in \Library\Printers from the reference Mac (which only ever had the two desired printers installed).
  • Furthermore, using the app Suspicious Package, I confirmed that the original manufacturer installer and my new package were doing the same task: just copying the same number of files to \Library\Printers - no other scripts were run.
    • Why not just use the original Ricoh installer? Well, it requires Rosetta 2 to launch, which seems completely unnecessary if it's only copying files. I wanted to strip the installation down to its basics.
• I used another app called PrinterSetup to generate a PKG that installs the desired printer using lpadmin commands.
• I then did a sanity test using the two PKG files on my own personal MacBook, running Sequoia and without Rosetta 2. The first package copied the contents of \Library\Printers, containing the printer drivers, as expected. The second PKG added the printer successfully, as expected. It shows up in System Settings → Printers & Scanners as idle, and it even has the correct Printer icon. But when I try to print to the device, I get the following error:
  • "Stopped" "'Filter' failed"
• I tried the PKG files on a MacBook running Tahoe, and without Rosetta 2, and I had basically the same result:
  • The Printer job status shows "Stopped" "'Data' failed", but checking the failure code in the CUPS web admin shows "'Filter' failed".

So, maybe the Ricoh installer is doing something else that Suspicious Package isn't catching? Maybe it is doing something with Rosetta 2 that is necessary? How could I go about figuring out what is causing the "'Filter' failed" error?

It seems baffling that that answer is not "Identity Governance Administrator", which is the role that was granted to me, but still seems insufficient to browse the many sections of the Identity Governance section in Entra...

I am trying to figure out the best (easiest, most effective, most elegant) solution for managing the default paper size in Excel (and Word to a lesser extent).

I work in a multi-regional environment.
Most of our installs are bi-lingual, and we often choose "U.S." installs as it's the best choice for international English, then combined with some local language options.

Right now, my problem is that on new install Office defaults to U.S. Letter size for creating new documents in both Word and Excel, but many of my departments are operating in countries where A4 is the standard size (and so is printing).

First question: How does Office decide what is going to be the default paper size?

I'm assuming it decides this based on either the Office install version (i.e. US-EN), or based on the Windows system regional language settings.

I wish we could have more control over this, as we often use US language settings, but we are working in overseas location. Choosing paper size based on timezone (for instance), would definitely make more sense for some (not all) organizations. But all of this is supposition: does anyone know how Office actually decides on the default paper size?

Second question: What's the best way to programmatically set the default paper size for Office across an organization (or a department)?

I already knowing about creating a new template file named Book.xltx and saving it in \Users\[Username]\AppData\Roaming\Microsoft\Excel\XLSTART - but frankly this seems so clunky. I'm wishing there was a Registry edit I could make, and/or a Powershell command I could use, to deploy a solution simply and invisibly to my users. Does anyone know of a better option? Right now I'm using InTune to manage the organization.

I have the same question for Word, but at least in Word you can relatively easily change the default paper size within the UI, in Word's settings, and my users can grasp this task much more easily than creating a new template file. Excel for some reason lacks the option to set a default paper size in its settings.

I'm currently trying to deploy printers to macOS machines using Intune, ABM, and Universal Print.

I seem to have it all working: I can add the printer via the Universal Print app in macOS.

But there is one annoyance:

My setup is in an international, multi-lingual environment. We default most installations to a bi-lingual setup (US and another local language), as US is the "best choice" for "generic International English".

When going to print from this Universal Printer, the "Paper Size" option only has the option for "US Letter". Most of our printers are A4 printers.

It lets you create "custom" sizes, but this is a huge hassle for users that are not necessarily tech savvy and don't know the standard paper sizes by heart. Furthermore, it only allows you to define paper sizes in inches, even if you explicitly specify "cm" or "mm". You have to change the system default measurement settings before it will allow you to define page sizes in metric.

This, again, is a big ask for every user to do, every time they login to a new device.

• Why can't Apple allow you to define papers sizes in Imperial or metric simultaneously? Having a default measurement system makes sense, but not allowing alternative measurements when you specify the unit seems unnecessarily restrictive / stupid.
• I'm not sure if it's Microsoft or Apple to blame here, but why can't the Universal Print system supply a list of common, globalized paper sizes, like US Letter, Legal, Tabloid, A3, A4, A5, A6 etc.?

Does anyone have a work-around or solution for deploying this in a way that makes more sense for users?